Jan. 26, 2007
Michael D. Griffin
Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
World Economic Forum
RELEASE: Speech Transcript
INCORPORATING SPACE INTO OUR ECONOMIC SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Good evening. Thank you for inviting me to speak tonight. It is not
often that an aerospace engineer is invited to speak to an economic
forum. However, I took a business degree along with my engineering
and physics coursework, and I appreciate the economic impact that
space has on our society, especially practical applications like
communications, navigation, weather and remote sensing satellites as
well as the economic, national security and scientific benefits. And
this says nothing of the less-quantifiable benefits of intellectual
inspiration.
Some of us gathered here tonight grew up during the Apollo era of the
1960s, NASA's apotheosis. We watched science fiction movies and
television shows that made us believe that we -- all of us and not
simply a few astronauts -- could become space travelers. Arthur C.
Clarke's and Stanley Kubrik's masterpiece of science fiction "2001: A
Space Odyssey" projected onto the screen of our collective human
consciousness a future for us where, by now, hundreds of people would
be living and working in space stations orbiting the Earth and
outposts would exist on our moon. We would be journeying to other
planets in our solar system, just as our European forbears came to
America looking for new beginnings. This space age vision of our
future proved illusory for our generation for two fundamental
reasons: the limitations of our economic resources and the
limitations of technology. Neil Armstrong's "giant leap for mankind"
was not a journey that could be sustained without a more concerted
investment of time, resources and energy than followed his seminal
achievement on July 20, 1969.
But I believe that there are economic and technological reasons why we
can now begin to afford and sustain this Vision for Space Exploration
in a fashion where we "go-as-we-pay," and why the nations of the
world making such investments of time, resources and energy will find
that the benefits far outweigh the costs and risks involved. We have
the technology and economic wherewithal to incorporate the benefits
of space into our sphere of influence -- to exploit the vantage point
of space and the space environment, and the natural resources of the
moon, Mars, and near-Earth asteroids. Space exploration is not simply
this century's greatest adventure; it is an imperative that, if not
pursued with some concerted effort, will have catastrophic
consequences for our society. I realize this is a bold statement, so
allow me to explain.
On the day before he was assassinated in Dallas, President John F.
Kennedy was in San Antonio, where he spoke about space exploration.
He invoked Irish writer Frank O'Connor, who told the story of "how,
as a boy, he and his friends would make their way across the
countryside, and when they came to an orchard wall that seemed too
high, and too doubtful to try, and too difficult to permit their
voyage to continue, they took off their hats and tossed them over the
wall -- and then they had no choice but to follow them." The United
States, the European Union, Russia, China, Japan, India, and others
have tossed our caps over the wall of space exploration.
In that same speech, President Kennedy recited several technical
advances from NASA's space program, explaining that "our effort in
space is not, as some have suggested, a competitor for the natural
resources that we need to develop the Earth. It is a working partner
and a co-producer of these resources." And he finished this speech
with the recognition of the costs and risks involved with space
exploration: "We will climb this wall with safety and with speed --
and we shall then explore the wonders on the other side."
Even an emotionless engineer can be moved by President Kennedy's
poetic framing of the issues of space exploration, but since this is
an economic forum, let me now turn to the "dismal science." When
President Kennedy spoke those words in 1963, the Gross Domestic
Product of the United States was approximately $2.8 trillion, in
FY2000 dollars. In 2005 it was approximately $11 trillion in those
same FY2000 dollars -- four times larger. In 1963, the U.S. federal
government spent approximately $600 billion, again in FY2000 dollars,
with NASA's allocation representing 2.3 percent of that amount. At
the spending peak of the Apollo program, NASA represented 4.4 percent
of the federal budget. Today, with a U.S. federal budget of almost
$2.5 trillion, NASA's budget represents about 0.6 percent of that.
Clearly our economy has grown, our society has changed, and our
priorities for government spending have changed since 1963. Thus, in
the latter half of the 1960s and early 1970s, our nation's leadership
decided that we should not sustain such a high percentage of
investment in the space program. In these years, the priorities of
the U.S. federal budget changed to accommodate the escalating costs
of the war in Vietnam, defense spending for the Cold War, and Great
Society programs. Today, the costs of the Global War on Terrorism,
Hurricane Katrina recovery, Social Security, and Medicare/Medicaid
dominate our federal government spending. The costs of our nation's
entitlement programs alone are projected to double in the next 10
years, from more than $1 trillion per year today to more than $2
trillion per year, as the baby boomers like me begin to retire. By
comparison, NASA's budget of $16.2 billion for this year is somewhere
in the realm of what engineers call rounding error, at 0.6 percent of
all federal spending.
Because of the magnitude of these changes over the last four decades,
it is important to view our nation's investment in our civil space
and aeronautics research program from this larger economic
perspective, because some critics have questioned the value
proposition of even the current investment in NASA. I believe that we
must recognize that the development of space is a strategic
capability for our nations, and that we must bring the solar system
into our economic sphere of influence. And equally, I believe that
NASA must leverage the great economic engine of our nation and world.
Thus, the companies and countries that many of you represent can take
advantage of the trails we plan to blaze as we explore space, just as
we leverage the capabilities you create.
As a U.S. federal agency, NASA expects only inflationary growth in our
annual budget. Thus, we have adopted a "go-as-we-pay" approach for
space exploration, science missions and aeronautics research. Thus,
the primary pacing item for new ventures is our nation's ability to
afford such capabilities.
Over the next three years, our highest priority is to complete
assembly of the International Space Station and honor our agreements
to our Russian, European, Japanese and Canadian partners in this
venture. It will not be easy. The International Space Station is the
world's greatest engineering project, akin to such feats as the Great
Wall of China, the pyramids of Egypt, the Panama and Suez canals, or
the sea walls of Venice. Friends of mine who worked on the Apollo
program have conveyed to me their belief that the construction of the
International Space Station is just as tough a job.
There are many critics of this space station, just as there were
critics of President Kennedy who called the Apollo program a
"moondoggle." But I believe that the greatest achievement of the
International Space Station partnership is the partnership itself,
and that's a tough thing to criticize. For over six years, astronauts
and cosmonauts have been living and working together onboard the
space station. For the United States, the station is a national
laboratory in space, where we will conduct research to make future
exploration to other planets in our solar system possible. I hope
this partnership will reap even greater dividends as we explore space
together over many future generations. The unifying vision that
forged this partnership during the 1990s, prompted by the
Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission, is what we endeavor to carry forward
today.
Our partnership has endured some hardships along the way, not least of
which was the Columbia accident. I hope and believe that those
hardships have built stronger bonds between us.
With the proper goals in mind, I believe the benefits of space
exploration far outweigh the risks. Among the most practical of these
is our work with hurricane-monitoring satellites, aircraft and
sensors that allow meteorologists to track such storms and predict
their severity and impact. Many people today do not even realize that
their weather forecasts rely on information from space assets.
Broader misconceptions exist. NASA spinoff technologies were never
Tang, Teflon or space pens. But while we actually can cite tens of
thousands of legitimate technology spinoffs, including medical
devices, fuel cells and batteries and even cordless tools, I would
like to discuss a more seminal point. I want people to realize the
key areas where NASA's space endeavors have created entirely new
industrial capabilities that improve our fundamental way of life.
For example, NASA is one of the major consumers of liquid hydrogen to
fuel our space shuttle and other rocket engines. Liquid hydrogen is
also used in the manufacturing of metals, glass, electronics and even
foods. When you hear the term "hydrogenated fats" applied to baked
goods like pastries and bread, it means that liquid hydrogen was one
of the ingredients. NASA is such a large consumer of liquid hydrogen
that after Hurricane Katrina, we returned several hundred thousand
gallons to the nation's reserve and delayed several space shuttle
rocket engine tests to alleviate a national shortage when our
nation's liquid hydrogen production facilities and supply lines were
disrupted. Likewise, we are a major consumer of liquid oxygen. Our
huge demand market for these propellants sparked fundmental
improvements in the production and handling of these volatile
substances. Today, the ready availability of liquid oxygen allows
firefighters, emergency response teams and nursing homes to carry on
their backs or in suitcases portable, hand-carried oxygen tanks. In
the 1960s, only select hospitals could supply oxygen, in hazardous
oxygen tents.
I am sure that many of you would agree with me that the greatest
revolution in our productivity and way of life has been the
development of the personal computer, internet and various handheld
communication devices. Thirty-five years ago, engineers like me used
three pieces of wood and a piece of plastic that moved -- the slide
rule -- to make calculations. Thirty years ago, 1,000 transistors
could fit on a silicon chip; today, it's 100 million. The cost of
such chips has dropped by a factor of 100,000. Few people know that
the development of the first microprocessors was born of a
competition between Fairchild and Intel in the 1960s, to build
components small enough to fit in NASA spacecraft. This
straightforward NASA technical requirement spawned a whole new
industry that grew in ways few, except perhaps Gordon Moore, could
predict. Necessity is the mother of invention, and I believe that we
are at our most creative when we embark on bold ventures like the
space program.
So, with the economic growth and technology development we have seen
since the 1960s, I believe that we are now entering a Renaissance
period of space exploration where we can realize the vision that
eluded us earlier. And as in the Renaissance, wealthy individuals
will play a role in advancing the work of our architects, engineers
and technicians. These will be entrepreneurs who have made their
wealth in other endeavors -- Jeff Bezos from Amazon, Bob Bigelow from
Budget Suites, Richard Branson from Virgin and Elon Musk of Paypal
fame are examples. These gentlemen and others have put their personal
time, resources and energy behind the notion that many more people
can have personal experience in space than do so today. It is one
thing to view pictures of Earth from the vantage point of space, even
on an IMAX screen, but it is another thing entirely to see it with
one's own eyes. Many friends of mine have spoken of the epiphany they
experienced from this.
But let me be clear. NASA's job is not to sponsor space travel for
private citizens. That is for private industry. My hope is the
reverse; that when the public can purchase rides into space, NASA can
leverage this capability. Likewise, I hope that one day NASA can
leverage the expertise of companies not unlike FedEx or UPS today, to
meet our cargo needs for the space station and future lunar outposts.
And one day, maybe, astronauts onboard our Orion crew exploration
vehicle on their way to the moon and Mars can top off on liquid
hydrogen from commercially available orbiting fuel stations.
In the process of building these new space capabilities, these
entrepreneurs, along with NASA and other companies, are hiring more
aerospace engineers. I believe that a key measure of a society's
economic growth is the extent to which we are educating a technically
literate people who can build the infrastructure to advance that
society. It is deeply troubling to me when education statistics for
the United States indicate there are more bachelor's degrees in
psychology being awarded than engineering degrees. I am sure that
even the economics majors here can appreciate my concern!
Again, NASA hopes to leverage, to the maximum extent possible, the
capabilities that space entrepreneurs hope to create. A few years
ago, when I was in the private sector working at InQTel, I helped
fund a small software company seeking a better approach to
visualizing satellite imagery. Over the years, that company grew into
the backbone for Google Earth. Now, we hope to "spin-in" that
capability to visualize imagery from other planets in our solar
system, like the moon and Mars, using data from various NASA
satellites and the Mars rovers. By invoking such commercial
capabilities, NASA can leverage the funding of other investors to our
mutual benefit.
In conclusion, I would like to leave you with a final thought as to
what might happen if we do not explore space, if we do not follow the
cap we tossed over the wall in the 1960s. Last month in the journal
Science, researchers examining the primordial material returned by
NASA's Stardust space probe found that some of that material could
not have come from the Kuiper Belt in the outer reaches of our solar
system, but instead could only have come from our sun's core. Some of
that material was even older than our own sun. The history of life on
Earth is the history of extinction events, with evidence for some
five major such events in the history of the Earth. The last of these
occurred approximately 65 million years ago, when the dinosaurs that
dominated the Earth for over 160 million years suffered a
catastrophic extinction. It is believed that this event was caused by
a giant asteroid which struck Earth in the Gulf of Mexico, triggering
tsunamis, tectonic shifts and radically changing Earth's climate.
The brief history of humans is next to nothing compared to the history
of other life on Earth, and even less so compared to the age of our
solar system or of the universe. Our species hasn't been around long
enough to have experienced a cataclysmic extinction event. But they
will occur, whether we are ready for them or not.
In the end, space exploration is fundamentally about the survival of
the species, about ensuring better odds for our survival through the
promulgation of the human species. But as we do it, we will also
ensure the prosperity of our species in the economic sense, in a
thousand ways. Some of these we can foresee, and some we cannot. Who
could claim that he or she would have envisioned the Boeing 777,
after seeing the first Wright Flyer? And yet one followed the other
in the blink of an historical eye.
For this and many other economic and scientific reasons, we must
explore what is on the other side of that wall, walk in the
footprints of Neil Armstrong, and make that next giant leap for
mankind.
Thank you.
-end-
To subscribe to the list, send a message to:
hqnews-subscribe@mediaservices.nasa.gov
To remove your address from the list, send a message to:
hqnews-unsubscribe@mediaservices.nasa.gov
